IMO, it seems that Windows (as it currently is) can and will never be truly "fixed", due to the overwhelming lack of security in the underlying operating system itself.
*nix has security built in from the ground up (in terms of the file system, the way programs are organised in memory and so on) which was never bothered with in Windows. It may have been slightly improved upon in recent years, but it's just not there in the same way as it is with *nix, because Microsoft have done it all in the wrong order by bolting the security on after it was already much too late.
So, in order to address that problem, Microsoft really want to just stop you being able to run unauthorised code (through TCPA, Palladium, etc.) because in effect that will "solve" the security problems caused by their own foolish "security" policies over the years.
As Abe Lincoln himself said "Those who are ready to sacrifice freedom for security ultimately will lose both."
So, in Microsoft's ideal world, the next versions of Windows are going to be "more secure" than the current ones, but purely at the expense of what you can do with them, because you won't be able to run any code that isn't Redmond approved.
Windows "aqcuired" these security problems because of a fundamentally foolish design in the first place, but anyone who thinks that a system like Palladium is the solution is a fool of equal magnitude. It's just yet another bodged fix for a problem that would have never even existed in the first place if Microsoft had given anything more than a rat's ass about security in the past.
Gentoo's "emerge" command is absolutely the friendliest and easiest way of installing software that I've ever come across.
Unlike Windows, where you have to download the installer and run it, or other flavours of Linux where you can encounter dependency hell or RPM hell - with emerge it's just a single command, and that's it.
So, for Mozilla, I'd type "emerge mozilla", go away for a little while (or even carry on working at the same time - it's no problem), come back, and I have an individually optimised (for my processor) version of Mozilla sitting there waiting for me - and damn it runs fast!
No messing with dependencies (it works them out), no manual compiles (it does it for you) - a braindead buffoon would struggle to get it wrong.
Honestly, I can't think of a better way of doing it. OK, so you have to wait a while for the download and compile, but the speed increase and reliability in the everyday useage of your software are worth it.
The only problem with Gentoo is that it's quite fiddly to install in the first place - however, the docs are good and very straightforward to follow. Once you have it up and running, it's absolutely killer!
I agree it's useful to receive your bills online - many utility companies in the UK allow you to do this already.
But really, what's the point of printing them out, then scanning them back in again so you can read them online? That seems incredibly backwards - the wrong solution to the problem.
It starts on a computer and ends on a computer, so cut out the middle piece of paper and save the trees... uhh... man!
What's the deal with these new all-singing-all-dancing colour ATMS anyway?
I want to get cash out quickly, not watch animations advertising crap I'm not interested in while the thing chokes under the strain of running Macromedia Flash (or whatever) when it should be doing the transaction and dispensing my money in the quickest time possible.
The colour and animation adds nothing but waiting time, turning what used to be a ten second operation into a minute long wait. (This is especially bad at night, when you really don't want to hang around at an ATM any longer than necessary. I should know - I was robbed by four guys while waiting for one to dispense my money.)
The old green-screen ATMs were ten times quicker to use than these new colour ones with animation. Has the rotating logo / crappy Flash / too much JavaScript craze of many a bad Geocities site taught us nothing at all? The best user interfaces are as simple as possible with as few distractions as possible.
When an unnecessary animated interface gets in the way of usability, it's time to stick with what worked. Bring back the green-screens!
While I hate spammers, I agree that it's not really practical to put any but the most prolific offenders in jail. (How about Alan Ralsky for a start?)
However, it does seem slightly ridiculous that the RIAA can fine you up to $150,000 per song, yet spammers only get fined 5,000 ($8,000) - something is out of balance there!
Still, this law is likely to have little effect on the real hardcore of spammers - most of whom are not located in the UK anyway.
Once again it's a prime example of the UK government wanting to be seen to do something, when in actual fact it's nothing more than a token gesture spin campaign that will never be enforced and won't make the slightest difference in the long run.
I wonder if governments will ever "get" this Internet thing... somehow, I seriously doubt it. Once again, they're legislating things they don't understand.
Joe sixpack (or is that Joe keg?) is to too damn stOOpid to turn off HTML. They LIKE pictures and crap. Sometimes I really wish that using the Internet required a fsking license!
HTML email is bloody ugly anyway. If I wanted to read my mail in bright pink 32pt Comic Sans on a bright green background - no doubt complete with animated GIFs of that fscking dancing baby and a 3D-rendered chrome-effect rotating email me logo - I'd take some hallucinogenic drugs, go to a childrens daycare center, sit in the post room and read a newspaper.
Most people (especially the non-technical variety who like to use HTML email) have serious deficiencies when it comes to any aspect of designing anything on a computer. Letting Joe Public near HTML formatted email is a serious error of judgement, since it gives him ample opportunity to display his hideous typographical ineptitude.
I've been sending email for almost ten years now, and have never, ever felt the need to use HTML formatted text. What's wrong with text-only mail clients? I've certainly never found them lacking.
There really is no need for HTML email, ever. We just don't need it - nobody does. Plain old text gets the message accross fine, every single time.
Without even taking into consideration the gaping security implications caused by HTML email, it's still one of the worst ideas in the entire history of the Internet. Whoever came up with it in the first place is a fool of the highest order.
Keep your poxy Outlook Express - anyone dumb enough to use it deserves everything they get.
I'd bet that at least some of the Senators are P2P users anyway!
This is half of the problem though, and it's the half the RIAA won't even admit exists.
It doesn't really matter how much money you have, CDs are a pain in the ass - to buy, to carry around, to store, to have to swap in your CD player every hour or so while listening.
Downloaded music (and not just p2p) works better - it's quick to get, convenient, easy to transport, easy to store in a virtual library, and easy to get rid of when you get tired of listening to it.
Of course people are going to download music rather than get it on CD - why would anyone in their right mind pay to inconvenience themselves?
Also, there's more legitimate free music on the Internet than you can shake a stick at - we don't even need record labels any more, and they know it only too well.
There is a LOT more to this problem than the cost alone, it's just that the RIAA and other corporate assholes like them only understand the language of $$$$$$$ and are too stupid to care about reality, instead holding as gospel all the bullshit toy statistics that their marketting assholes invented for them.
However, membership in the RIAA doesn't necessarily mean that the labels are *pro* the latest RIAA moves.
That may be true, but it doesn't make much difference - the RIAA still get money from the labels that are members, whether the labels support the RIAA's actions or not. We need to get record labels to see that only those who are not members of the RIAA will prosper - we need to make labels want to cancel their RIAA membership, because it is losing them sales.
Stop buying music from RIAA affiliated labels, and spend all your music-buying money on music released on non-RIAA affiliated labels.
I'm not saying this is particularly likely to happen, but since the advent of RIAA Radar, it's pretty easy to avoid buying CDs from RIAA members if it's something you feel strongly enough about.
For the losses of the major labels to stop being attributed to online piracy and start being attributed to the real causes (too much crappy manufactured music, totally uninteresting artists who only care about making money, etc.) we have to get the smaller, independant, non-RIAA affiliated labels to make big profits from our support of them.
While this may be true, it's extremely unlikely unless you get your music released. Prior to having your music released, it would nearly always be necessary to get any samples cleared (meaning that you check with the copyright holder and pay an appropriate royalty fee for use of their work).
If you are just having a bit of fun writing music at home, then sample anything and everything you like. As long as you don't go making millions of dollars (which is unlikely for a few years yet) from other people's samples / tunes, you have nothing to worry about. You might want to exercise a bit of caution if you get as far as releasing any of your music online - if you have very obvious samples and your tune is popular, you could possibly be forced to pull it.
Still, it's lunacy for an amateur computer musician to be worrying about copyright infringement, and scare-mongering like this only helps to further propagate the FUD that the music industry want to force down our throats to stamp out creativity and ensure they maintain control of the market.
The number one rule with sampling is to sample anything and everything (copywrong or not) - just make sure that you mangle it up enough that it's completely unrecognisable, so that it truly is your own work whatever the source material is.
Slashdot Mirror
IMO, it seems that Windows (as it currently is) can and will never be truly "fixed", due to the overwhelming lack of security in the underlying operating system itself.
*nix has security built in from the ground up (in terms of the file system, the way programs are organised in memory and so on) which was never bothered with in Windows. It may have been slightly improved upon in recent years, but it's just not there in the same way as it is with *nix, because Microsoft have done it all in the wrong order by bolting the security on after it was already much too late.
So, in order to address that problem, Microsoft really want to just stop you being able to run unauthorised code (through TCPA, Palladium, etc.) because in effect that will "solve" the security problems caused by their own foolish "security" policies over the years.
As Abe Lincoln himself said "Those who are ready to sacrifice freedom for security ultimately will lose both."
So, in Microsoft's ideal world, the next versions of Windows are going to be "more secure" than the current ones, but purely at the expense of what you can do with them, because you won't be able to run any code that isn't Redmond approved.
Windows "aqcuired" these security problems because of a fundamentally foolish design in the first place, but anyone who thinks that a system like Palladium is the solution is a fool of equal magnitude. It's just yet another bodged fix for a problem that would have never even existed in the first place if Microsoft had given anything more than a rat's ass about security in the past.
It's slower than IE, and doesn't display some sites correctly. That makes it worse than IE. Period.
Mod parent up: +5 funny
What planet are you on?
Gentoo's "emerge" command is absolutely the friendliest and easiest way of installing software that I've ever come across.
Unlike Windows, where you have to download the installer and run it, or other flavours of Linux where you can encounter dependency hell or RPM hell - with emerge it's just a single command, and that's it.
So, for Mozilla, I'd type "emerge mozilla", go away for a little while (or even carry on working at the same time - it's no problem), come back, and I have an individually optimised (for my processor) version of Mozilla sitting there waiting for me - and damn it runs fast!
No messing with dependencies (it works them out), no manual compiles (it does it for you) - a braindead buffoon would struggle to get it wrong.
Honestly, I can't think of a better way of doing it. OK, so you have to wait a while for the download and compile, but the speed increase and reliability in the everyday useage of your software are worth it.
The only problem with Gentoo is that it's quite fiddly to install in the first place - however, the docs are good and very straightforward to follow. Once you have it up and running, it's absolutely killer!
I agree it's useful to receive your bills online - many utility companies in the UK allow you to do this already. But really, what's the point of printing them out, then scanning them back in again so you can read them online? That seems incredibly backwards - the wrong solution to the problem. It starts on a computer and ends on a computer, so cut out the middle piece of paper and save the trees... uhh... man!
Mod parent up... insightful!
What's the deal with these new all-singing-all-dancing colour ATMS anyway?
I want to get cash out quickly, not watch animations advertising crap I'm not interested in while the thing chokes under the strain of running Macromedia Flash (or whatever) when it should be doing the transaction and dispensing my money in the quickest time possible.
The colour and animation adds nothing but waiting time, turning what used to be a ten second operation into a minute long wait. (This is especially bad at night, when you really don't want to hang around at an ATM any longer than necessary. I should know - I was robbed by four guys while waiting for one to dispense my money.)
The old green-screen ATMs were ten times quicker to use than these new colour ones with animation. Has the rotating logo / crappy Flash / too much JavaScript craze of many a bad Geocities site taught us nothing at all? The best user interfaces are as simple as possible with as few distractions as possible.
When an unnecessary animated interface gets in the way of usability, it's time to stick with what worked. Bring back the green-screens!
While I hate spammers, I agree that it's not really practical to put any but the most prolific offenders in jail. (How about Alan Ralsky for a start?)
However, it does seem slightly ridiculous that the RIAA can fine you up to $150,000 per song, yet spammers only get fined 5,000 ($8,000) - something is out of balance there!
Still, this law is likely to have little effect on the real hardcore of spammers - most of whom are not located in the UK anyway.
Once again it's a prime example of the UK government wanting to be seen to do something, when in actual fact it's nothing more than a token gesture spin campaign that will never be enforced and won't make the slightest difference in the long run.
I wonder if governments will ever "get" this Internet thing... somehow, I seriously doubt it. Once again, they're legislating things they don't understand.
Check your "facts"! it was Elerium-115 (not 114) in X-Com.
AFAIK, there was no element number given for the Zrbite in "Terror From The Deep".
(No wonder I can't remember anything important, ever - my head is too full of useless shit!)
Joe sixpack (or is that Joe keg?) is to too damn stOOpid to turn off HTML. They LIKE pictures and crap. Sometimes I really wish that using the Internet required a fsking license!
HTML email is bloody ugly anyway. If I wanted to read my mail in bright pink 32pt Comic Sans on a bright green background - no doubt complete with animated GIFs of that fscking dancing baby and a 3D-rendered chrome-effect rotating email me logo - I'd take some hallucinogenic drugs, go to a childrens daycare center, sit in the post room and read a newspaper.
Most people (especially the non-technical variety who like to use HTML email) have serious deficiencies when it comes to any aspect of designing anything on a computer. Letting Joe Public near HTML formatted email is a serious error of judgement, since it gives him ample opportunity to display his hideous typographical ineptitude.
I've been sending email for almost ten years now, and have never, ever felt the need to use HTML formatted text. What's wrong with text-only mail clients? I've certainly never found them lacking.
There really is no need for HTML email, ever. We just don't need it - nobody does. Plain old text gets the message accross fine, every single time.
Without even taking into consideration the gaping security implications caused by HTML email, it's still one of the worst ideas in the entire history of the Internet. Whoever came up with it in the first place is a fool of the highest order.
Keep your poxy Outlook Express - anyone dumb enough to use it deserves everything they get.
I'd bet that at least some of the Senators are P2P users anyway!
This is half of the problem though, and it's the half the RIAA won't even admit exists.
It doesn't really matter how much money you have, CDs are a pain in the ass - to buy, to carry around, to store, to have to swap in your CD player every hour or so while listening.
Downloaded music (and not just p2p) works better - it's quick to get, convenient, easy to transport, easy to store in a virtual library, and easy to get rid of when you get tired of listening to it.
Of course people are going to download music rather than get it on CD - why would anyone in their right mind pay to inconvenience themselves?
Also, there's more legitimate free music on the Internet than you can shake a stick at - we don't even need record labels any more, and they know it only too well.
There is a LOT more to this problem than the cost alone, it's just that the RIAA and other corporate assholes like them only understand the language of $$$$$$$ and are too stupid to care about reality, instead holding as gospel all the bullshit toy statistics that their marketting assholes invented for them.
However, membership in the RIAA doesn't necessarily mean that the labels are *pro* the latest RIAA moves.
That may be true, but it doesn't make much difference - the RIAA still get money from the labels that are members, whether the labels support the RIAA's actions or not. We need to get record labels to see that only those who are not members of the RIAA will prosper - we need to make labels want to cancel their RIAA membership, because it is losing them sales.
Stop buying music from RIAA affiliated labels, and spend all your music-buying money on music released on non-RIAA affiliated labels.
I'm not saying this is particularly likely to happen, but since the advent of RIAA Radar, it's pretty easy to avoid buying CDs from RIAA members if it's something you feel strongly enough about.
For the losses of the major labels to stop being attributed to online piracy and start being attributed to the real causes (too much crappy manufactured music, totally uninteresting artists who only care about making money, etc.) we have to get the smaller, independant, non-RIAA affiliated labels to make big profits from our support of them.
While this may be true, it's extremely unlikely unless you get your music released. Prior to having your music released, it would nearly always be necessary to get any samples cleared (meaning that you check with the copyright holder and pay an appropriate royalty fee for use of their work).
If you are just having a bit of fun writing music at home, then sample anything and everything you like. As long as you don't go making millions of dollars (which is unlikely for a few years yet) from other people's samples / tunes, you have nothing to worry about. You might want to exercise a bit of caution if you get as far as releasing any of your music online - if you have very obvious samples and your tune is popular, you could possibly be forced to pull it.
Still, it's lunacy for an amateur computer musician to be worrying about copyright infringement, and scare-mongering like this only helps to further propagate the FUD that the music industry want to force down our throats to stamp out creativity and ensure they maintain control of the market.
The number one rule with sampling is to sample anything and everything (copywrong or not) - just make sure that you mangle it up enough that it's completely unrecognisable, so that it truly is your own work whatever the source material is.